Bismarck weekly tribune., 1887-02-04

disease. 8 %s, ~ y
~ FOR THE AGRICULTURE COLLEGE.
/ No. las. By Mr.. Cain, appropriates $21O
for purchase of the guns and equipments,
and gun lockers for, same, of the light in
fantry Of Huron, Tor use Of the agricl lltureal
college at Brookings.
# HOUSE. ~
TwENTY-THIRD DAY. ~
"a Net at 2 O'Clock, thk speaker presiding.
Prayer by the chaplain, followed by roll
call Of members. ts..- T., +. s....#5. AZ
Reading of the journal of yesterday dis
pensed with. a,: .l.+.+rG
.F On motion tof Mr.. AIKENS, the rules
were suspended and the house went Into
committee of the whole on general order,
Mr.. HARKINS in the chair.
House bill No. 106, to facilitate making
proofs in actions brought to recover money,
committee with recommendation to pass.
Mr.. CROSE moved that the bill be rec
commended to pass. t g. =.
Mr.. SULLIVAN would like to have the
author explain the bill.
Mr.. .PRUITT explained the object of
the bill to be to facilitate results in exparte
cases. -.-a -
Mr.. SULLIVAN could see no necessity
for the proposed law, besides it put the
burden Of proof upon the defendant, and
that he thought wrong. He thought the
law should remain just as it is, and keep
the burden of proof upon the party who
seeks to collect. He thought it wrong
and pernicious bill, and he moved as sub
stitute that it be made the special order of
nnVf MnnhQu offnrnnnn
Mr.. AIKENS, thought the bill was mis-
understood, and he explained its prvisions
at some length. He thought it was in the
interest OF both debtor and creditor. He
thought the burden Of proof, placed upon
the debtor was to his advantage if he was
honest.
Mr.. ADAMS, as a member of the COM
the bill, thought if the bill was good one
no harm could come from further delay.
Mr.. CROSE could see no occasion for
further delay. The bill had been in the
hands OF the Judiciary committee who had
examined it closely. The claim that the
bill if it became law would overturn the
whole present system of jurisprudence he
house would vote down the proposition to
postpone.
The motion to make the bill the special
order of next Monday prevailed.
No. Al. Reported from the judiciary
committee with recommendations to pass.
Relates to private corporations.
Mr.. STEWART moved that the bill be
recommended to pass, and the motion pre-
vailed.
Council bill No. 56. Unfavorably re-
ported from the judiciary committee. Re-
lating to issue OF warrants.
Mr.. HOBART moved that the bill be re-
ported back to the committee with recon-
mendation that it do not pass.
Mr.. SULLIVAN favored the provisions of
the bill and opposed the motion of Mr..
Mr.. AIKEN thought the bill was simply
an incentive to perjury.
The motion to recommend indefinite
postponement prevailed.
House bill No 1r7. Relating to terms of
residence required before beginning suits
for divorce. Unfavorably reported by the
Mr.. BURNHAM moved that the bill be
to indefinite ,postponement.
As the introducer of the bill, Mr.. Cooper
asked for information as to the reasons for
0pSG:''lS Mr.. &IKiNS Il L; did not doubt that the
divorce laws Of the territory were too loose
but he did not think this bill would cure
had lived in the territory long enough to
acquire residence he was entitled to rights
and the protection of the laws, which this
bill denied him. He thought it strange
idea that man could be member of the
legislative body and help to pass a law the
privileges of which he would not be en-
titled to till three months after.
Mr.. SULLIVAN said the senate had
passed on the same subject, and he sug-
gested that the pending bill be referred to
the same committee that had the council
bill in charge.
After further discussion the motion to
recommend for indefnitel postponement
Council bill No. 81. Relating to the bur-
the committee on military affairs with rec
to pass.
Mr.. STEWART, of Fall River, moved to
recommend for indefinite postponement.
Mr.. WHITE moved to amend by striking
out the word unwilling" from the second
section.
Mr.. HOBART opposed the motion. He
pose it.
Mr.. BURNHAM said the gentleman
expressed his sentiments. We do not want
to place the ex-soldiers in the category of
Mr. MENTzER: "There is no pauperism
about it. 1t is a duty we owe, and the
water runs down hill. 1 am willing to
bear my share"
Mr.. MALLORY thought we should
gladly do anything in our power in recog-
milton of the survivors of the war of the
rebellion. He would strike out even more
than proposed and provide for the burial
of soldiers who died, whether their friends
were able to bury them or not.
Mr.. ADAMS said 'it might be good
thing to amend the bill so as to let soldiers
who are not members of the Grand Army
rot on the prairie," suggesting that that
was about the spirit Of the opposition to
the bill. He thought the people owed it to
The veterans to smooth their pathways in
life and when they passed away to insure
them becoming burial.
Mr.. BERRY said that while he knew
that the remains Of members of the Grand
Army were assured .reverent attention
when they had ceased to live, still there
were those outside the Grand Army who
might be buried out of the pauper fund
and lie in pauper graves. He thought this
should not be permitted.
Mr.. SHOOK said that there were many
soldiers whose homes were far removed
from any Grand Army post. 1t was for
such men that this bill proposed to pro-
vide. He hoped it would pass.
Mr.. WHITE thought it unjust to the SOL
diers and their friends to suggest that any
Of them would be found unwilling" to care
for their dead.